Does the church attract sexual deviants?

[stewpot54]

I watched a debate yesterday re child abuse in tne church.

They came up with many reasons for and against the 'cover up' of these activities by the power that be in the church.

Yet they never asked why it seems more prevalent in this sphere than most other occupations.

Priests lead an unnatural life by vowing not to marry and engage in normal relationships.

So surely this must attract deviants who do not want a normal family life.

They know whatever activities they pursue re child sexual abuse etc. will

hardly ever be curtailed or damned by the church because they need to be seen as a power for the good and nothing must get in the way of that.

I think if priests were allowed to lead a 'normal' way of life it would detract from the deviants attraction to the priesthood.

[Rioja]

Is sexual abuse more prevalent amongst the clergy or is it that we just don't hear about scandals involving HSBC covering up for their employees or the Civil Service or Tesco?

 

I'm sure child sex abuse goes on throughout society in a variety of occupations. Clergy tend to be in positions of trust and have unfettered access to children, unlike say warehousemen, but that doesn't indicate a prevalence in that occupation, just that they have more opportunity.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Are you suggesting that homosexuals, who tend not to marry and engage in (what you seem to consider to be) 'normal' relationships are deviants?

 

Are you allowed to say things like that?

[stewpot54]

Are you suggesting that homosexuals, who tend not to marry and engage in (what you seem to consider to be) 'normal' relationships are deviants?

 

Are you allowed to say things like that?

 

That is why I chose my words carefully.Perhaps you thought otherwise.I apologise if that is how it came across.

If you have to explain every nuance of your wording it becomes a long and boring diatribe.

[stewpot54]

Is sexual abuse more prevalent amongst the clergy or is it that we just don't hear about scandals involving HSBC covering up for their employees or the Civil Service or Tesco?

 

I'm sure child sex abuse goes on throughout society in a variety of occupations. Clergy tend to be in positions of trust and have unfettered access to children, unlike say warehousemen, but that doesn't indicate a prevalence in that occupation, just that they have more opportunity.

 

That was the point I was making Thsnkyou for agreeing with me.

[Sausage Dog]

Is the Pope Catholic?

[HeadingNorth]

Is sexual abuse more prevalent amongst the clergy or is it that we just don't hear about scandals involving HSBC covering up for their employees or the Civil Service or Tesco?

 

I'm sure child sex abuse goes on throughout society in a variety of occupations. Clergy tend to be in positions of trust and have unfettered access to children, unlike say warehousemen, but that doesn't indicate a prevalence in that occupation, just that they have more opportunity.

 

It is because of the larger opportunity that people who want to abuse chlidren are far more likely to take up a job as a priest, than they are to take up a job as a warehouseman.

 

It isn't the Church that corrupts them, it's the availability of their target that leads them into the Church to begin with. That is why there's a larger prevalence of child abusers within the Church; just as there is, also, within the teaching profession and amongst scoutmasters, foster carers, girl guide helpers and so on. People who want to abuse children, look for work that involves children.

[Rioja]

It is because of the larger opportunity that people who want to abuse chlidren are far more likely to take up a job as a priest, than they are to take up a job as a warehouseman.

 

It isn't the Church that corrupts them, it's the availability of their target that leads them into the Church to begin with. That is why there's a larger prevalence of child abusers within the Church; just as there is, also, within the teaching profession and amongst scoutmasters, foster carers, girl guide helpers and so on. People who want to abuse children, look for work that involves children.

 

You are right I think. So permitting, for example, Catholic priests to marry and have normal relations wouldn't work because it isn't the celibacy that corrupts them.

[HeadingNorth]

You are right I think. So permitting, for example, Catholic priests to marry and have normal relations wouldn't work because it isn't the celibacy that corrupts them.

 

It might reduce the incidence, simply by opening the priesthood up to people who, currently, would never take orders because they want to be married.

 

It would not prevent paedophiles from thinking, "Hmm. Priest. That's a job with unfettered access to young children." But it would make it harder for them to become one, because of increased competition for the post.

[Rupert_Baehr]

That is why I chose my words carefully.Perhaps you thought otherwise.I apologise if that is how it came across.

If you have to explain every nuance of your wording it becomes a long and boring diatribe.

 

No need to apologise; you haven't offended me.

 

As to whether (or not) the church attracts paedophiles, then unfortunately, I suspect the answer is "Yes" - just as any occupation or activity which allows access to young people is likely to attract paedophiles.

 

Paedophiles are attracted to the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church (and probably a whole host of other churches) Scouting and Teaching - to name 4 well-known paedophile targets.

 

It seems to be impossible to protect children from paedophiles by legislation alone, so I suggest it's up to the organisations which are likely to be targetted by paedophiles to be vigilant to ensure they don't employ any.

 

If a church (or any other organisation, for that matter) has a high percentage (say 80%) of employees who are 'married with families' then statistically it is likely to have a lower percentage of paedophile employees than an organisation which has no married employees.

 

What would happen if an organisation adopted a policy of declining to employ homosexuals (thus reducing, statistically, the risk that it might employ paedophiles)?

 

Well we all know the answer to that one, don't we? - It was debated on this forum in this thread just a couple of months ago. This month the Pope is one of the baddies because he didn't do enough to stop paedos. - Back then, he was criticised for declining to employ known homosexuals, notwithstanding that such a policy would reduce the chance of employing paedophiles.

 

NB 'All male paedophiles who assault little boys are homosexuals' is NOT the same as 'All male homosexuals are paedophiles who assault little boys.'

 

The question of whether the Catholic Church should allow priests to be married has nothing to do with paedophilia. I think they might get more applicants for the job were they to open it up to married people - but that's their choice. Christian priests weren't always celibate - that practice didn't really become common until the 11th century.

 

Interestingly perhaps, The policy of Pope Pelagius II: (580 AD) was "not to bother married priests as long as they did not hand over church property to wives or children."

 

Conversely, of course if the priests weren't married and didn't have any children then the church would get everything they owned when they died.

 

(If they'd thought of a Labour government, inheritance tax and a lying Scotsman they wouldn't have needed even to consider celibacy ... The church would take most of what the priests had while they were alive and confiscate the rest when they died.)

 

There are a number of organisations which attract paedophiles but that in itself causes two problems:

 

1. Protecting the children. By far the most important, but if society is 'over protective', it can aggravate the 2nd problem:

 

2. Recruiting sufficient suitable people to do the job.

 

I understand that there are very few male teachers in primary schools. The government would like to see more male teachers in primary schools.

 

Many male teachers are reluctant to work in primary schools because of 'comments' about paedos. Stereotyping may be wrong, but it's far from extinct.

 

I suspect the same 'comments' may dissuade ideal applicants from other employment/community service where they are sorely needed.